Nothing about the idea of Canada joining the European Union has ever made any sense. More trade with Europe? Absolutely. But a political union? It is not just ludicrous but impossible on multiple levels, including constitutionally. And one of the oddest things about it has been watching the idea come almost exclusively from the centre-left of the Canadian political spectrum. If anything, it is the right that should welcome the idea.
To wit: On Wednesday in Brussels, the European Parliament resoundingly passed new rules for member states on asylum policy. Removal orders for people found living illegally in EU member countries will come with an actual short-term obligation to leave — what a concept! — and if authorities deem a person a risk to abscond, that person can be detained for up to 30 months while the authorities sort out the file. Countries can also deport these people to “return hubs” — third countries willing to accept them to await the final decision.
As the bill passed, the parliament chamber echoed with cries of “send them back!”
Britain’s 2022 agreement to deport illegal migrants to Rwanda, where they would be processed and then resettled in other countries, was hugely controversial in Britain, where anti-migrant sentiment is far more mainstream and open than in Canada. (To be fair, the European bill specifies these third countries must have a respectable human rights record. It would be a stretch to put Rwanda in that category.)
So, let us pause and imagine the outcry were any Canadian politician to propose deporting failed asylum seekers and illegal residents to a third country willing to take them, even a relatively high-functioning one — Panama, say, or Barbados. Heads would explode. “Trumpian! Trumpy Trump Trumpian!” people would cry. Which is ironic, because the whole “Canada into the EU” narrative is based on Brussels providing a supposed moral antipode to modern Washington.
By my rough count, most of the prominent voices advancing this “Canada in the EU” narrative are, in fact, European. And they often evince just as much of an idealized view of Canada as some Canadians do of the EU.
European Perspectives on Canada
The Economist’s Brussels bureau chief Stanley Pignal kicked things off way back in January of 2025. “Both (Canada and the EU) trade openly, fret about global warming and dislike guns, the death penalty and Russian aggression,” he wrote in the magazine’s Charlemagne column.
“Despite a residual attachment to the frontier spirit, Canadians can be thought of as honorary Europeans,” he wrote. “Like Europeans, Canadians believe that markets work but must be tempered by welfare states. Both trade openly, fret about global warming and dislike guns, the death penalty and Russian aggression.”
OK. But that describes basically every developed Western democracy except the United States.
What the EU Could Offer Canada
Somewhat more compellingly, Pignal went on to describe what the EU could do for Canada.
“The Brussels antitrust machinery has done a fine job keeping competition vibrant in areas such as banking, airlines and telecoms, giving Europeans a better deal than Canadians get,” he noted.
Indeed, Canada could learn from specific EU policies without joining the union. The EU’s recent asylum reforms demonstrate a pragmatic approach that Canada might consider adapting to its own context. However, the idealized view of the EU held by some Canadians overlooks the complexities and trade-offs inherent in any political integration.
Ultimately, Canada can benefit from observing EU successes and failures, but joining the EU remains an impractical and unnecessary goal. The lessons are valuable, but they do not require a formal political union.
